RallyIQ

ATP · Right-handed · 42 charted matches · 2014–2025

Dusan Lajovic

Archetype: Rallies through the middle · Crosscourt backhand

Against an average opponent

Serve points won 62.5% ±2.7 raw 59.0% · tour 63.4% · 2,859 points
Return points won 35.4% ±2.7 raw 32.6% · tour 36.6% · 2,798 points

Serve and return points won, refitted against every opponent at once so a record built on weak or strong opposition is put on the same scale. Career, all surfaces, with a 90% margin. Raw is the plain share of points won.

Value per 100 shots

Direction choice ±0.00 ±0.10 better than 57% of ATP · raw ±0.00
Shot selection −0.28 ±0.16 better than 25% of ATP · raw −0.28
Execution +0.03 ±0.42 better than 70% of ATP · raw +0.03
Tactical adaptability +0.02 first serves toward what's working, set to set · 42 matches
Adaptation speed +0.06 same, every two to three service games · per 100 first serves
Long-rally execution −0.28 ±0.59 shot 9 on v own earlier rally shots · 2,003 shots · better than 37% of ATP
Points left on the table 2.65 per 100 shots vs best direction · lower than 46% of ATP

Points gained per 100 shots compared with an average tour player in the same position, adjusted for the strength of the opponents faced, with a 90% margin (shots clustered by match). Raw is before the opponent adjustment. Built on 15,118 shots.

Shot expected value

The share of points Dusan Lajovic goes on to win after each option in the positions they face most often, shrunk toward tour average when the sample is small. Showing the 8 most-used options; teal marks the best one with at least 30 shots.

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 1,130 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 34% 43.2%±4.1 47.6%
BH through the middle 16% 39.6%±5.6 43.7%
BH slice crosscourt 15% 36.3%±5.8 42.5%
FH inside-out 11% 48.5%±6.9 51.8%
BH down the line 10% 37.9%±6.8 46.4%
BH slice through the middle 7% 29.4%±7.4 35.1%
FH through the middle 2% 40.5%±11.8 45.2%
FH inside-in 2% 54.2%±12.1 54.7%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your middle

position worth 51% to the average player · 809 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 27% 48.6%±5.3 52.7%
FH down the line 22% 43.9%±5.8 51.5%
FH through the middle 19% 44.1%±6.2 47.0%
BH crosscourt 12% 52.0%±7.6 49.1%
BH through the middle 10% 48.4%±8.1 46.8%
BH down the line 4% 36.6%±11.1 48.3%
FH down the line + approach 2% 74.6%±11.5 70.5%
BH slice crosscourt 1% 45.0%±14.5 47.0%

Long rally, 9+: drive to your backhand side

position worth 46% to the average player · 682 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
BH crosscourt 28% 42.0%±5.6 48.0%
BH slice crosscourt 17% 44.7%±7.1 42.1%
BH through the middle 15% 41.4%±7.2 43.8%
BH down the line 12% 46.4%±8.1 46.5%
BH slice through the middle 10% 29.9%±8.1 35.1%
FH inside-out 9% 50.0%±9.0 52.6%
BH slice down the line 3% 23.5%±11.2 35.8%
FH inside-in 2% 56.7%±13.8 54.3%

Rally, shots 5–8: drive to your forehand side

position worth 44% to the average player · 677 shots

OptionUsedWin %Tour
FH crosscourt 52% 43.2%±4.2 46.6%
FH through the middle 20% 41.3%±6.4 41.5%
FH down the line 18% 46.8%±6.9 44.7%
FH slice through the middle 7% 16.8%±7.6 24.5%

Serve under pressure

Pressure predictability index +7 How much less varied Dusan Lajovic's first-serve direction gets on break points. Positive means easier to read. Based on 308 break-point first serves.

Deuce court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 48% 42% 65% / 73%
Body 10% 7% 61% / 63%
T 42% 51% ▲ 67% / 75%

1,414 normal · 72 break-point 1st serves

Ad court

1st serveUsageBreak ptWon when in
Wide 57% 60% 66% / 73%
Body 11% 8% 64% / 63%
T 32% 32% 63% / 72%

1,135 normal · 236 break-point 1st serves

Is the serve mix in equilibrium?

Game theory says a well-mixed server wins equally often with every direction they use. If one direction wins more, it's underused and points are being left behind. This is the minimax test Walker and Wooders ran on Wimbledon finals, applied to every charted first serve. Win rates include faults. "Optimal" allows for returners reading a habit. No measurable response (−0.05 ± 0.15 points per 100 serves for every 10 points of habitual usage), measured from ATP servers whose mix drifted between matches. Shifts stay within the range servers' habits actually vary, the only range that response was measured over.

Deuce court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide48% 57.8%±3.0 n=707 52% ▲
Body10% 59.4%±6.1 n=147 13% ▲
T43% 56.1%±3.2 n=632 35% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.61).
Optimal mix: ±0.0 per 100 first serves.

Ad court

1st serveUsagePoints wonOptimal
Wide57% 60.8%±2.8 n=787 70% ▲
Body11% 67.1%±5.9 n=144 11%
T32% 59.0%±3.7 n=440 19% ▼

Consistent with an optimal mix (p = 0.11).
Optimal mix: +0.3 per 100 first serves.

Exploitability 0.13 points per 100 first serves What the optimal mix would win over the current one, both courts. More exploitable than 100% of ATP servers. Tested on matches they weren't fitted on, ATP mixes picked this way win 0.33 per 100 first serves on average.

Repeating the previous direction to the same court: +3.0±2.9 points per 100 against switching. Negative means returners read repeats. Tour-wide, repeating costs women about 0.4 points per 100 and costs men nothing, so men's returners don't measurably anticipate direction. (1,217 repeats, 1,556 switches.)

Return by serve direction

Return points won against each serve direction, compared with the tour average.

ServeCourtDirectionPointsWonvs tour
1stAd courtBody 65 33% −4.3±7.9
1stAd courtT 282 31% +2.5±4.3
1stAd courtWide 518 25% −2.6±3.0
1stDeuce courtBody 94 29% −7.7±6.7
1stDeuce courtT 447 25% +0.2±3.3
1stDeuce courtWide 407 23% −4.0±3.3
2ndAd courtBody 94 50% +0.5±7.4
2ndAd courtT 90 45% −4.5±7.5
2ndAd courtWide 272 46% −2.8±4.7
2ndDeuce courtBody 119 51% +2.5±6.7
2ndDeuce courtT 255 43% −6.9±4.8
2ndDeuce courtWide 149 44% −3.7±6.1

Signature patterns

Recurring sequences that win more than Dusan Lajovic's own baseline, ranked by edge weighted by how often they're used.

Serve → +1

  1. Wide serve (ad court) → FH inside-in used 2.9% · won 62% · +0.9±7.8 vs own baseline
  2. Wide serve (ad court) → FH crosscourt used 4.8% · won 59% · −2.1±6.5 vs own baseline
  3. Wide serve (ad court) → FH through the middle used 2.0% · won 55% · −5.8±9.1 vs own baseline
  4. Wide serve (deuce court) → FH crosscourt used 2.4% · won 54% · −7.0±8.5 vs own baseline
  5. Wide serve (ad court) → FH inside-out used 2.9% · won 54% · −7.0±8.0 vs own baseline

Return

  1. vs T serve (deuce court) → BH through the middle, mid used 2.2% · won 44% · +8.3±9.7 vs own baseline
  2. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH through the middle, deep used 2.3% · won 40% · +4.8±9.5 vs own baseline
  3. vs wide serve (deuce court) → FH through the middle, mid used 3.0% · won 39% · +3.3±8.7 vs own baseline
  4. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, short used 2.4% · won 39% · +3.7±9.4 vs own baseline
  5. vs wide serve (ad court) → BH crosscourt, deep used 2.4% · won 39% · +3.2±9.3 vs own baseline

Rally, consecutive own shots

  1. FH inside-out → FH crosscourt used 1.4% · won 51% · +8.2±9.4 vs own baseline
  2. BH crosscourt → FH inside-out used 1.6% · won 50% · +7.5±9.1 vs own baseline
  3. FH crosscourt → FH down the line used 3.8% · won 48% · +4.7±6.5 vs own baseline
  4. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle used 2.7% · won 48% · +5.2±7.5 vs own baseline
  5. FH down the line → FH crosscourt used 2.6% · won 48% · +4.7±7.7 vs own baseline

Discovered sequences

Mined from every me → opponent → me run of three shots, with no templates. Ranked by how much more often Dusan Lajovic wins the point once the sequence happens, weighted by how often it happens. Think of them as chess openings.

  1. Wide serve → BH through the middle return, deep → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 62% · +17.1±11.1 vs own baseline · +25.4 vs tour on the same sequence
  2. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.5% · won 57% · +12.6±10.2 vs own baseline · +11.2 vs tour on the same sequence
  3. FH crosscourt → FH through the middle → FH down the line used 0.7% · won 53% · +8.6±9.2 vs own baseline · +4.4 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Lorenzo Musetti (4/6)
  4. Wide serve → BH through the middle return → FH crosscourt used 0.3% · won 58% · +13.1±11.8 vs own baseline · +12.0 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Arthur Fils (4/6)
  5. FH down the line → BH through the middle → FH crosscourt used 0.8% · won 51% · +6.5±8.5 vs own baseline · −0.9 vs tour on the same sequence Disrupted by Arthur Fils (2/6), Lorenzo Musetti (4/6)
  6. Wide serve → BH crosscourt return, mid → FH inside-out used 0.4% · won 53% · +8.2±10.9 vs own baseline · +4.5 vs tour on the same sequence

Strengths and vulnerabilities

Value per 100 shots compared with the average player hitting (strengths) or facing (vulnerabilities) the same shot. Only shot types seen at least 120 times.

Hurts opponents most with

BH to the middle · return+2.8392
T 2nd serve · deuce court+2.5332
Wide 2nd serve · ad court+2.1279
FH to their backhand · return +1+1.7197
BH to their backhand · return +1+1.6214

Most exposed to

FH to their backhand · return−3.8176
FH to the middle · return−3.6462
FH to their forehand · return−2.7179
T 2nd serve · deuce court−2.2255
BH to their backhand · return−1.8600

Best-equipped opponents

Active players whose shot mix lines up best against these weaknesses, by structural compatibility per 100 rally shots: Rafael Nadal +2.55, Miomir Kecmanovic +2.23, Jack Draper +2.10, Casper Ruud +1.99, Roberto Bautista Agut +1.98

Favourable matchups

Miomir Kecmanovic +1.08, Fabian Marozsan +0.94, Roberto Carballes Baena +0.83, Pedro Martinez +0.79, Roberto Bautista Agut +0.76

Active players who are best at the shot in the top weakness: Miomir Kecmanovic, Andy Murray, Joao Fonseca, Bernard Tomic, Albert Ramos

Tactical fingerprint

Each bar shows how far a style trait is from the ATP average, in standard deviations.

1st serve in68%
Deep returns35%
Wide serves · ad57%
Run-around forehands29%
Forehand share57%
Avg rally length4.4
Wide serves · deuce48%
Chipped returns22%
Backhand slice26%
Drop shots / shot1.8%
BH down the line21%
Unforced errors / shot10.3%
Through the middle24%
Point-ending shots22.1%
Serve & volley2%
T serves · deuce43%
Points at net8%
T serves · ad32%
FH down the line26%

Plays most like

  1. Casper Ruud 2017–2026 plan v
  2. Dominic Thiem 2011–2024 plan v
  3. Ben Shelton 2021–2026 plan v
  4. Lorenzo Musetti 2019–2026 plan v
  5. Tennys Sandgren 2014–2021 plan v
  6. Thiago Seyboth Wild 2019–2026 plan v
  7. Tallon Griekspoor 2018–2026 plan v
  8. Tommy Robredo 2003–2022 plan v

Closest from another era

  1. Carlos Moya 1997–2007
  2. Guillermo Coria 2002–2005
  3. Albert Costa 1996–2002

Charted matches